18:01:19 #startmeeting new-modules-meeting 18:01:19 Meeting started Wed Aug 3 18:01:19 2016 UTC. The chair is gregdek. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:01:19 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 18:01:19 The meeting name has been set to 'new-modules-meeting' 18:01:27 #chair rbergeron gundalow 18:01:27 Current chairs: gregdek gundalow rbergeron 18:01:34 #topic Roll Call 18:01:40 yo 18:01:44 (gundalow notes that he'll be 15m late) 18:02:13 hi 18:02:19 * rbergeron waves 18:02:22 Agenda, as always: https://github.com/ansible/community/issues/92 18:02:30 meetings, so missed 18:03:13 Working the agenda from bottom to top: 18:03:56 #topic Archive Module 18:03:58 https://github.com/ansible/ansible-modules-extras/pull/2323 18:04:02 óla 18:04:27 Hey abadger1999 :) 18:04:55 So looks like dag gives this one a shipit, and since he's the author of the unarchive module, seems like his shipit carries disproportionate weight here 18:05:16 howdy 18:05:34 yo 18:06:37 * gregdek waits for folks to have a look 18:07:25 Concept is reasonable. Don't like that the code is all in the main() function but we don't really patrol code quality in extras. 18:08:00 gregdek: it looks good to me. Lots of feedback back and forth and seems like everything has been addressed more or less? 18:08:06 Seems like it. 18:08:32 plus, as you said, dag :) 18:08:36 * gundalow waves 18:08:48 hey gundalow :) 18:09:59 Any objection to putting this one in shipit for final review? 18:10:17 +1 18:10:25 LGTM 18:10:31 (looks good to me) 18:11:03 I assume filecmp, zipfile and tarfile are part of default python 18:11:15 that's two +1's, any reason not to just merge it? 18:11:28 Sure, just merge 18:11:30 That's up to y'all. :) 18:11:57 oh, am as I'm core do I get full vote rights? 18:12:25 Do we want to be adding stuff to MAINTAINERS-EXTRAS as we give shipits (I can update that) 18:12:46 Well, when we actually merge, yes. 18:13:14 gundalow: yes you are core and have full voting rights :) 18:13:23 It would be nice if older PRs such as this had tests run on Shippable, but the only way I know to do that is to have the contributor push their branch again. 18:13:59 In this case it won't matter, since it's a new module and has no tests. 18:14:15 shippable doesn't have a retest option in the github ui? 18:14:39 Shippable doesn't know about the PR because we added Shippable after the PR was last updated. 18:14:40 anyway it was tested and passed, since this is modules that shouldn't have changed so not really worried about it 18:14:53 well, tested on travis then 18:14:57 famous last words 18:15:17 and it will be tested on shippable after merging 18:15:26 OK, so we're shippping, then. 18:15:30 Seems like we're agreed. 18:15:33 +1 18:15:36 hey mattclay :) 18:15:43 Who's doing it, and shall we move on? 18:15:49 * mattclay waves 18:15:54 * gundalow will, and I'll update MAINTAINERS 18:15:58 Either we shipit now, or we add the "shipit" label to make sure we do it later... 18:15:59 :) 18:16:03 OK, thx gundalow 18:16:08 Next up: 18:16:29 #topic datadog_downtime module 18:16:30 https://github.com/ansible/ansible-modules-extras/pull/2381 18:17:04 Copious +1s after several attempts. :) 18:17:09 * gregdek will brb 18:17:56 hi all. jeff from logicmonitor here. spoke to some of you at the fest last week. i'm late because i didn't realize there was a separate meeting room. just want to make sure i didn't miss discussion of our module. 18:18:10 hi Jeff 18:18:14 hey jeff-logicmonito :) 18:18:39 we meet again 18:18:49 jeff-logicmonito: hey, that was me :) 18:19:02 you didn't miss it 18:19:12 * gundalow is vritual greg 18:19:13 gregdek: well -- aside from the "do we really mind if people are saying works_for_me for their own module submissions 18:19:17 " 18:19:18 thing 18:19:44 rbergeron: i don't mind if they do, but it adds no weight for me generally 18:19:47 ... it seems like others are okay with it that had been waiting on it 18:19:59 alikins: oh, just noticed you added comment son file/archive 18:20:24 oh and abadger1999 18:20:55 well, skornehl and goekhanm both give it shipit 18:21:08 but otherwise... nobody else seems sad or anything 18:21:10 gundalow: sorry -- I saw "mark for final review" earlier so started putting comments in. 18:21:17 gregdek: indeed, i missed that there was a second person 18:21:25 alikins: abadger1999 It's cool. I'm glad you spotted stuff 18:21:28 * abadger1999 can always find something to nitpick about. 18:21:35 I'll ask the submitted to patch it 18:21:40 Not like anyone is using it yet 18:21:45 18:21:58 So then we're shipping it and we'll ask for a subsequent patch, or...? 18:22:08 I'll ask for a patch 18:22:16 It's safe as no one is using it 18:22:25 if it was an update to a module I'd be more tempted to revert 18:22:28 Before or after merge? 18:22:30 on which? 18:22:44 Are we merging, or waiting for a new patch to merge? 18:22:44 2323 archive 18:22:50 ah 18:22:57 sorry, I should have changed topic back 18:23:03 Ohhhhh. 18:23:06 OK, carry on 18:23:11 Well, no, wait. 18:23:11 datadog_downtime 18:23:13 it's all good. are we kosher with 2381? i think we are 18:23:18 Are you merging 2323 or not? 18:23:47 I've already merged 2323. I'm going to add a follow up comment asking him to raise a new PR to fix the few minor issues 18:23:54 Got it. Thanks! 18:24:10 . 18:24:10 . 18:24:11 . 18:24:11 . 18:24:11 . 18:24:14 . 18:24:16 OK, back to 2381... ok to put into shipit, or merge directly, or neither? 18:24:17 datadog_downtime 18:24:41 :ship: 18:25:15 also: jeff-logicmonito -- hi and welcome :) (sorry, got distracted by other typing of things) 18:25:42 gregdek: i am for at least shipit, not able to comment on the merge part of it but that sounds delightful if possible :) 18:26:22 So, put it in shipit for final review? 18:26:27 Sounds like the consensus. 18:26:34 NO 18:26:36 NO 18:26:44 the docs for 2381 are all erong 18:26:58 or some letters like that 18:27:16 Ok! 18:27:23 unless you already spotted that 18:27:41 I'm just asking the questions, LOL 18:28:11 do we have a policy on using stdlib modules that are imported via the 'from ansible.module_utils.basic import *' ? stuff like time,sys,re, etc 18:28:30 alikins: ziploaded concerns? 18:28:34 since 2.1, they are not 'autoimported' 18:28:49 modules should specify their own if they use em 18:28:52 I'd prefer module to import those itself for clarity, even if the modules do get imported into the local namespace from the splat 18:29:05 gundalow: so what's wrong with the docs? 18:29:21 agreed, but that would go with removal of 'from ansible.module_utils.basic import *' form 18:29:29 yup 18:29:30 to new 'actual improt' 18:29:35 import 18:29:37 I(api_key): 18:29:43 and general lower level of wtf 18:29:55 (just adding comments 18:30:07 'wheres that from' that is 18:30:11 we should be doing that 'in passing' to modules we touch, not mandatory for 2.2, but proably should be for 2.3 18:30:38 ok, so gundalow is adding comments to the PR directly, we will put back into needs_revision I imagine? 18:30:40 for modules in the repo, not going to remove the facility as custom ones might still use 18:31:54 gregdek: sounds like it 18:33:07 Is someone also adding comments about expected usage of module_utils import? 18:33:13 (And is that in the module guidelines?) 18:34:50 http://docs.ansible.com/ansible/developing_modules.html#common-module-boilerplate 18:34:53 it was updated 18:35:14 OK, very good. 18:35:19 but most of these PRs predate it 18:35:25 so do most modules .... 18:35:42 Yes, it's a moving target, of course. But at least we can point people to the new guidelines. 18:36:23 I think we got that one covered. 18:36:24 Moving on: 18:36:44 #topic AWS NAT Gateways 18:36:48 https://github.com/ansible/ansible-modules-extras/pull/1882 18:37:34 This is from linuxdynasty, who was at the contributor conference 18:37:52 And there was conflict among two modules, so I picked this one because it had tests and both had multiple advocates 18:38:08 wow 18:38:11 it has tests! 18:38:29 inorite 18:38:45 its a trap! 18:38:52 linuxdynasty is *very* excited about testing. 18:39:55 +10000000000000000 18:41:30 (though I have a few minor docs things) 18:41:42 If someone can look at the code that would be good :) 18:42:37 I think the various aws folks have all gone through this with a pretty srs comb haven't they? 18:42:43 gregdek ^^ ? 18:43:04 Seems like a lot of them have. 18:43:50 My comments are only nitpick. And only there because apparently I'm not allowed to go raise one EPIC PR to fix all formatting for all modules :( 18:43:58 * ryansb hasn't personally tested, but would be pro-shipit 18:44:13 you can't do "EPIC PRs" ? 18:44:37 Once this is merged, lets make sure to ask for a PR to get the tests added. 18:44:43 gundalow: you're core now. You can do whatever you need to do. 18:45:04 Unless the core team says you can't, LOL 18:45:15 jtanner: I was told I shouldn't go round just fixing typos/spelling. In the same way I shouldn't just do PRs that only fix PEP8 18:45:39 (though I have ignored this for modules/networking/*) as there were spelling mistakes & formatting issues 18:45:42 If this is the most feedback we have, I say we mark for shipit. 18:45:45 i've never agreed with that 18:45:48 okay, so: can we shipit? let's do that. :) 18:46:00 fix whatever you find 18:46:39 jtanner: woot 18:46:44 I vote we mark "shipit" and let submitter fix issues with separate PR. We know he's engaged. 18:46:49 Any objection? 18:46:50 gregdek: +1 18:46:51 sure :) 18:46:53 gundalow: typos/spelling +1 to just fix. PEP8, I feel good about it but others do not... Figure networking is fair game since you are one of the primaries for that subcategory. 18:47:30 * gundalow will add to MAINTAINERS 18:47:31 I'm pro docs/typo fixing, but for whitespace I'm ambivalent about fixing just whitespace in a PR 18:47:33 abadger1999: aye 18:48:09 ryansb: oh, I agree. my vimrc screams if there is trailing whitespace. I only fix that if I'm making other changes that justify a PR 18:48:20 OK! 18:48:24 #topic Open Floor 18:48:41 vmware_guest was merged into extras yesterday 18:48:43 jeff-logicmonito: hello! 18:48:46 hi! 18:48:50 What's your PR? 18:48:58 * rbergeron suspects it is https://github.com/ansible/ansible-modules-extras/pull/2652 :) 18:49:12 correct 18:49:55 i appear totally incapable of updating my PRs and have them pass travis if i leave them untouched for awhile. sorry about that. =[ 18:50:00 and looks like jimi removed the needs_revision on the previous PR 18:50:12 are we picky on the order of DOCUMENTATION, EXAMPLES, RETURNS ? 18:50:16 jeff-logicmonito: more our fault than yours. 18:50:34 #topic Logic Monitor PRs 18:50:38 which seemed to have all the necessary shipits otherwise 18:51:02 correct. the only changes necessitating the new PR was some docs formatting fixes jimi pointed out at the fest 18:51:04 jtanner: good question. It's generally in that order, don't know if it's a killer. 18:51:25 the linter didn't seem to care, so i suspect not .. but i have to wonder 18:51:25 I presume that jimi|ansible can vouch for these changes, since he recommended them personally ;) 18:51:51 he told me that docs build threw errors, so i fixed the errors 18:52:39 i should point out that the doc generator doesn't actually accept ALL valid YAML for the documentation string. it was freaking out on the line continuations i was using. not a big deal to take those out, but took some digging to figure out what it was complaining about 18:53:08 jeff-logicmonito: Do you list Linux for a specific reason under requirements. Are there none linux versions of logicmonitor? 18:53:09 "Manage your LogicMonitor account through Ansible Playbooks" ... technically modules can be used from ansible adhoc too 18:53:30 s/ Playbooks/ will fix that 18:53:47 jtanner: I'd like to be picky about the order but no code relies on it. 18:54:53 re windows: i think there is some weirdness with our windows collector installer that the decision was made not to support it in ansible at this time 18:55:04 jeff-logicmonito: cool 18:55:34 Would sort of like feedback from jimi|ansible here... 18:56:14 gregdek: did his removal of needs_revision not provide enough feedback? :) 18:56:15 "import urllib" ... 18:56:25 it's just for param encoding 18:56:37 i think we have a 'safe' wrapper for that 18:57:21 Oh, right, we're supposed to use the url stuff in module_utils before urllib, right? 18:57:34 looking for example 18:57:45 we have a parsing method, not sure if we have an encoding method wrapper 18:58:16 "When fetching URLs, please use either fetch_url or open_url from ansible.module_utils.urls rather than urllib2; urllib2 does not natively verify TLS certificates and so is insecure for https." 18:58:26 Refers to urllib2, though, not urllib 18:58:34 And don't know the difference in this case 18:59:18 jeff-logicmonito, jtanner: If it's just for param encoding it's fine. 18:59:25 k 18:59:34 i swear that's all 18:59:35 i see that outbound calls are through our lib 18:59:46 It really does mean urllib2 -- urllib2 fetches files (urllib does not). 18:59:49 "self.urlopen = open_url" 19:00:15 yeah i checked all that already 19:00:36 as jeff-logicmonito said, it was only a docs issues, so if they compile now i'm ok with the module 19:00:37 "santaba" is that a product codename? 19:00:52 correct 19:01:25 Well then. 19:01:37 jimi|ansible gives his thumbs up, so shipit. 19:01:51 SHIP ZE DAMN MODULE 19:01:53 awesome. thanks everyone! 19:01:54 * rbergeron is with that 19:02:10 jeff-logicmonito: I've added some docs feedback 19:02:15 nice work jeff-logicmonito. 19:02:42 And that's our time for today. Thanks everyone! 19:02:46 #endmeeting